User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 48

  1. #11
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,538

    Smile Yes

    The problem with intelligent design is that it is dishonest, for it is simply a cover for creationism.

    But we should not feel superior, for MBTI suffers from the same problem.

    MBTI claims dishonestly to be a personality test, but in seventy years not one double blind experiment has been done.

    So both intelligent design and MBTI are dishonest.

    And both come out of the same stable - the largest economy in the world.

    So do we love the dollar so much we will accept lies?

    And the answer is yes.

  2. #12
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,538

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by foolish heart View Post
    The true scientist is willing to venture into any territory and entirely open to reality as it exists, seen or unseen, provable or not.
    This is the no true Scotsman fallacy.

    Just click on - No True Scotsman - RationalWiki

  3. #13
    Senior Member Pixelholic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Posts
    571

    Default

    The biggest difference is MBTI isn't posited as an equal to neuroscience the way ID is to Evolution.
    “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.” -Nietzsche

  4. #14
    Just a statistic rhinosaur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Hey everyone, a little bit of a necro post but I thought you would enjoy this.


  5. #15
    Senior Member Lily flower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    2
    Posts
    931

    Default

    I am a conservative Christian, but I would say that I am fairly open minded about how God created, whether through evolution, etc. However, about a month ago I decided to read a book that actually explained evolution (from an anti-creationist view). I expected to be really swayed by the science, but instead I was amazed at how weak the whole concept was. Microevolution (which I have always believed in - natural selection and within species changes) makes a lot of scientific and logical sense. Macroevolution (the idea that one species evolved from another) actually made no sense at all when I read the science behind it. In fact, the author even said that many of the major tenants behind macroevolution are contradictory to microevolution. Crazy!

    I suggest that before you take a scientific stance on evolution that you read a couple books about it first.

  6. #16
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lily flower View Post
    I am a conservative Christian, but I would say that I am fairly open minded about how God created, whether through evolution, etc. However, about a month ago I decided to read a book that actually explained evolution (from an anti-creationist view). I expected to be really swayed by the science, but instead I was amazed at how weak the whole concept was. Microevolution (which I have always believed in - natural selection and within species changes) makes a lot of scientific and logical sense. Macroevolution (the idea that one species evolved from another) actually made no sense at all when I read the science behind it. In fact, the author even said that many of the major tenants behind macroevolution are contradictory to microevolution. Crazy!

    I suggest that before you take a scientific stance on evolution that you read a couple books about it first.
    Actually, macroevolution is exactly the same as microevolution. It's a false dichotomy promoted by creationists. What creationsists call macroevolution is simply cumulative microevolution. Speciation (distinct species separating from each other) i.e. "macroevolution" has been observed in nature as well as created by humans both in the lab and through breeding (modern-day sheep can no longer produce offspring with the wild sheep it was bred from, apparently).

    I can try to dig up some sources for you if you don't believe me. My field isn't evolution but I have taken a few classes that covered various aspects of it throughout my biology degree and grad school.

    edit: even wikipedia will tell you :
    Macroevolution can be seen as the sum of long periods of microevolution, and thus the two are qualitatively identical while being quantitatively different.
    Do you mind if I ask what the title of that book is? I might take a look.
    -end of thread-

  7. #17
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,490

    Default

    The whole 'debate' is just an artifact of Fundamentalism. The ironic thing is science as we know it came out of Judaic/Christian/Islamic tradition. It's basically a battle between cousins, one being six fingered mountain folk.

  8. #18
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lily flower View Post
    I am a conservative Christian, but I would say that I am fairly open minded about how God created, whether through evolution, etc. However, about a month ago I decided to read a book that actually explained evolution (from an anti-creationist view). I expected to be really swayed by the science, but instead I was amazed at how weak the whole concept was. Microevolution (which I have always believed in - natural selection and within species changes) makes a lot of scientific and logical sense. Macroevolution (the idea that one species evolved from another) actually made no sense at all when I read the science behind it. In fact, the author even said that many of the major tenants behind macroevolution are contradictory to microevolution. Crazy!

    I suggest that before you take a scientific stance on evolution that you read a couple books about it first.
    I good book to start with is Charles Darwin's, "The Origin of Species". It's a lovely little book, easy to read.

    And then you might follow up with James D. Watson and Francis Crick's book, "The Double Helix", which confirms, "The Origin of Species".

  9. #19
    Courage is immortality Valiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE
    Posts
    3,919

    Default

    This truly is one of those things that makes me realize that we're not that far away from medieval times.
    Creationism is hilarious if you read their theories. I'm a somewhat religious person myself, although not really a follower of any code or rules.
    Creation probably happened pretty much like the big bang theory suggests, and evolution itself is, as several members say, proven.
    It's odd how some people can't accept the best possible logical arguments based on what we know.
    The same people tried to stick to that the world was flat for quite some time...
    AND that it was created just a few thousand years ago, at that, which is entirely disproven.
    In my mind, a book created by an almighty God that knows everything... Well, it shouldn't contain errors like that.
    Which in turn suggests that it was completely made up by some guy with an active imagination.
    Which would make it all an early work of Science-Fiction or Fantasy.
    I'm sure evolutionary theory isn't very far off the mark from how stuff really works, even if some of it is logical guesswork.

    Mightier than the tread of marching armies is the power of an idea whose time has come

  10. #20
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    The concept of intelligent design is the epitome of the conditio humana. It says nothing about the world but all about our way of understanding.

Similar Threads

  1. 41. The structure of DNA appears to be intelligently designed, what are the implicati
    By lightsun in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 08-11-2017, 08:15 PM
  2. Evolution vs. Intelligent Design/Creationism
    By Anentropic IxTx in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 161
    Last Post: 11-10-2013, 11:56 PM
  3. The Evolution of Human Cognition, Artificial Intelligence, Supervenience
    By ferunandesu in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-16-2012, 09:46 AM
  4. Darwinism vs. Intelligent Design - good take on this issue
    By Sniffles in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 124
    Last Post: 12-15-2009, 07:20 AM
  5. Ken Miller on Intelligent Design
    By darlets in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-08-2007, 05:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO